About The "Protestant"/"Evangelical" Daughters of Rome

See: CCR December 14, 2007

http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/The_Great_Controversy_Between_Christ_and_Satan_the_Conflict_of_the_Ages_1000203160/769

It was recently stated in the United States Senate (February 16, 1888), in a debate on the bill for 'national aid in the establishment and temporary support of common schools,' . that a senator had showed to the speaker, who had read it with his own eyes, the original letter of a Jesuit priest. In this letter he begged a member of Congress to oppose the bill and kill it, saying that they had organized all over the country for its destruction, that they had succeeded in the Committee of the House, and that they would destroy the bill inevitably; and it is a fact that the bill, having three times passed the Senate in three different Congresses, each time with a larger vote in its favor, has been repeatedly smothered in the Committee of the House, by those who knew that there was a majority in the House in favor of the bill; and for six years the legislation of Congress has been [thus] arrested. "

The Roman Church largely controls the secular press of the country; and the leading "Protestant" religious papers, such as the New York Evangelist, the Christian at Work, the Christian Union, and the Independent, all pay nattering tribute to the papacy. The Evangelist, of March 29, 1888, acknowledges Cardinal Gibbons as its " only cardinal;" the Independent wishes Pope Leo XIII. "a long reign and Godspeed in his liberalizing policy;" Christian at Work salutes him as "Holy Father," and in the name of " the whole Chris- tian world " glorifies him as "this venerable man whose loyalty to God and zeal for the welfare of humanity are as conspicuous as his freedom from many errors and bigotries of his predecessors is remarkable;" and the Christian Union, January 26, 1888, acknowledges him as " a temporal prince " and "supreme pontiff. " NOTE ii. PAGE 573. "

These movements are apparent under diverse forms and in different ways, but the organization which embodies almost every form, and works in every way to gain its end, is the National Reform Association. It originated in a conference representing "eleven different denominations of Christians from seven of the States of the Union. "

It now has the support of prominent men from "all branches of the church," of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and the Prohibition party. 

It proposes to have our national Constitution amended, " in order to constitute a Christian government," "acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the ruler among the nations, his revealed will as the supreme law of the laud;" and so placing "all Christian laws, institutions, and usages of our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land." One of its propositions, announced by David Gregg, D. D., pastor Park Street Church,
GENERAL NOTES.689
Boston, is that the State has " the right to command the consciences of men." Another, announced by the Christian Statesman, is that government must "enforce upon all that come among us the laws of Christian morality." Another, announced by the Rev. E. B. Graham, is that ' ' if the opponents of the Bible do not like our government and its Christian features, let them go to some wild, desolate land; and, in the name of the devil, and for the sake of the devil, subdue it, and set up a government of their own on infidel and atheistic ideas, and then, if they can stand it, stay there till they die." Another, announced by Jonathan Edwards, D. D., is that Jews, and all Christians who keep the seventh day, are to be classed as atheists, and " must be treated, as for this [National Reform] question, one party " with atheists, who " cannot dwell together on the same continent " with the National Reform Christianity.

Anybody can see at a glance that the establishment of the National Reform theory of government would be but the establishment of a theocracy. And this is, in fact, what they propose to establish. They say that "a republic thus governed is of Him, through the people, and is as really and truly a theocracy as the government of Israel." A monthly reading of the National W. C. T. U., written by Miss Willard, on God in government, says: "A true theocracy is yet to come, [and] the enthronement of Christ in law and law-makers, hence I pray devoutly, as a Christian patriot, for the ballot in the hands of women." And in her annual address to the National W. C. T. U. Convention, of 1887, Miss Willard said: "The kingdom of Christ ' must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics. There are enough temperance men in both [the Democratic and Republican parties] to take possession of the government and give us national prohibition in the party of the near future, which is to be the party of God.


We pray Heaven to give them no rest . until they shall . an oath of allegiance to Christ in politics, and march in one great army ' up to the polls to worship God.' .

I firmly believe that the patient, steadfast work of Christian women will so react on politics within the next generation that the party of God will be at the front." Now a man-made theocracy is only a scheme of government which puts man in the place of God. That is precisely the theory upon which the papacy was built, and that is just what the papacy is. The National Reform theory is identical with that of the papacy; therefore the establishment of the National Reform theory in this government will be but the setting up of a living image of the papacy. Advocating, as these parties are, the papal theory, it is not to be wondered at that they are anxious to secure the co-operation of the papacy In carrying their scheme to success. The Christian Statesman is the official organ of the National Reform Association, and in an editorial, December 1 1, 1884, that paper said: "We cordially, gladly, recognize the fact that in the South American republics, and in France and other European countries, the Roman Catholics are the recognized advocates of national Christianity, and stand opposed to all the proposals of secularism. .

Whenever they are willing to co-operate in resisting the progress of political atheism, we will gladly join hands with them. In a World's Conference for the promotion of national Christianity " which ought to be held at no distant day " many countries could be represented only by Roman Catholics. " And in that same paper, August 31, 1881, Rev. Sylvester Scovil said: "This common interest ["of all religious people in the Sabbath " " Sunday] ought both to strengthen our determination to work, and our readiness to co-operate in every way with our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens. We may be subjected to some rebuffs in our first proffers, and the time is not yet come when the Roman Church will consent to strike hands with other churches " as such; but the time has come to make repeated advances, and gladly to accept co-operation in any form in which they may be willing to exhibit it. It is one of the necessities of the situation. The nexus between the two great divisions of Christianity on questions of moral legislation is a thing worthy the consideration of our best minds and our men of largest experience in such affairs." In perfect accord with this is the Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII., 1885, which directs that " all Catholics should do all in their power to cause the constitutions of States, and legislation, to be modeled on the principles of the true church, and all Catholic writers and journalists should never lose sight, for an instant, from the view of the above prescriptions." Therefore as the purpose of the National Reform Association is identical \\ ith that of Rome, it is only to be expected that they should show a readiness to " gladly join hands. " And whenever Protestantism gains control of the civil power, whether with or without the aid of Rome, that will be but to erect an image of the papacy. NOTE 12. PAGE 578." There are still observers of the Bible Sabbath in Abyssinia. Joseph Wolff, in his journal for 1836, giving an. account of his visit to that country, says that "the Sabbath of the Jews, i. e., Saturday, is kept strictly among the Abyssiniaiis in the province of Hamazien."

See:

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2015/03/1911-protestants-fell-in-line-with-rome.html

Santorum "Protestant" Electorial Support

Richard John Neuhaus
ex-Lutheran who became a Roman Catholic Priest, wrote a manifesto with Charles Colson, titled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together”

Opus Dei Roman Catholic Rick Santorum is getting his electoral support from those that should know better but don't.

According to this March 23, 2012 article in The New York Times "Santorum's Catholicism Proves a Draw to Evangelicals":

After more than a century of widespread antipathy between Catholics and evangelical Christians, a Catholic with Italian immigrant roots from the industrial Northeast has emerged as the favored presidential candidate among evangelicals, even in states he lost over all, like Ohio and Illinois. On the eve of Louisiana’s primary on Saturday, Mr. Santorum had won a plurality of the evangelical vote in 9 of 16 states, according to exit polls by Edison Research.

“Santorum represents a game-changer,” said D. Michael Lindsay, the president of Gordon College, a Christian school near Boston, and an expert in evangelical voting patterns. “His candidacy has the potential to reshape conservative political alignment, securing once and for all evangelical support for a conservative Catholic in public life.”

Mr. Santorum has, in fact, performed far better with evangelical Christians than with Catholics, who have preferred Mitt Romney, a Mormon, in virtually every state. Through a critical reading of the data, Mr. Santorum’s base of evangelical Protestants and conservative Catholics could be seen by cynics as a coalition of zealots, held together by intolerance. By another way of thinking, however, his candidacy offers proof of a growing tolerance on the part of evangelical Christians, a willingness to shed ancestral religious prejudices.

What is it abut Santorum that would get these peoples' support? Santorum was best known as a 'right wing" Roman Catholic probably better known for being vilified by the LGTG lobby . But in this poor economy, largely but hardly exclusively the blame of the previous 'Republican' U.S. President Bush 43, where's the legitimate self interest in viewing 'social issues' which are largely with the possible exception of abortion completely outside the preview of government?

Indeed, regarding "life" where are these "Christians" on the various wars overseas with grossly disproportionate and usually misdirected revenge for the events of September 11, 2001? Or on that cigarette-pharma-alcohol protectionist racket of the "war on [some] drugs"? Though relatively few grasp the broader scam of the 'drug war', many do, at least regarding Cannabis/Marijuana

Over 50% public opinion can be found for legalizing Marijuana.

Are not a great many such people concerned about the increasing centralization of powers?

Are not they suppose to be proponents of limited government?

One would think that would translate to support for the 'Republican' Party candidate holding closer to such values: Ron Paul. Yet Paul gets 4th place, with the pair of such "conservatives" of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich between Paul and the previously appointed "frontrunner" Mitt Romney.

Santorum is said to get this support owing to his commitment to "social issues". That he has done better in the 2012 Republican primary than Gingrich flows with the idea of people being disgusted with the latter as a hypocrite for his marital infidelity, in contrast to the remaining three as of March 31, 2012: Santorum, Romney and Paul. Romney is mistrusted as a "moderate" 'etch a sketch' candidate, except perhaps on Cannabis/Marijuana which he defends the status quo of suppressing the plant while being okay with its pharmaceuticalization, while Paul is deemed unacceptable for not being sufficiently pro national security as the mainstream media defines such, e.g. pro unlimited NSA surveilling people's electronically transmitted activities, connected to Federal-Local law enforcement 'FUSION" centers, without any oversight to guard against politically motivated searches and seizures, with a Pentagon agenda including developing and deploying miniature drones- eventually insect sized. Of course both 'social conservatives' Santorum and Gingrich and the 'moderate' Romney promise to be more likely to bomb Iran. And of course, the people are overlooking the flip-sides, e.g. how all of this stuff can back fire badly, that this growing surveillance state, with the blissful disregard of the issue of oversight, all covered over by the lie that the USA is immune to human failings- aka 'American Exceptional-ism'

But like the "Tea Party" or the copy-cat Obama-fan "Coffee Party", this gets thrown out of the window. Rah Rah rally around the flag with little thought. Likewise with much of the "left" with the continuing distraction from the problem of mercantilism by blaming "capitalism" in general. Or anything in general. Over-generalizations about a broad array of things: "drugs" (ironic given a "Coffee" and Tea" parties) "urban freeway" or "fill in the blank" - a prescription likely disastrous- leading to all sorts of missteps and contradictions. For instance- Oppose Obama Care, but somehow fail to question the cigarette-pharma mercantilist drug war. Nor question the USDA/FDA's clearly criminal mercantilist anti customer right to know conspiracy regarding labeling of GMO ingredient, along with the sweatheart exemption from product labeling of the ingredients laws for alcohol and Tobacco products.

Thhe general public needs to brush up on some history- google "ultramontane".

How did this come to pass?

Obviously the increasing Jesuitical infiltration of the schools and media. Including the establishment of the college fraternity system.

The New York Times article does not go any of those places; instead crediting this man, a Lutheran who became a Roman Catholic:

The road had also been paved for Mr. Santorum by evangelical Protestants and conservative Catholics, who for decades had tried to define common theological and political ground. In 1994, a panel led by the evangelical activist Charles Colson and the Catholic writer Richard John Neuhaus wrote a manifesto titled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together.” While acknowledging the divides in ritual and dogma, the document presented them as allies against “a widespread secularization” that “increasingly descends into a moral, intellectual and spiritual nihilism.”

Such top-down efforts coincided with shifts in grass-roots religious life. “In the last 30 years, you’ve had a lot of breaking down of denominational lines within the evangelical community,” said William Martin, a sociologist at Rice University who has specialized in evangelical Christianity. “You had the growth of megachurches that don’t emphasize denomination or doctrine the way evangelicals once did. Catholics benefit from that. And the fear of modernity and relativism that has come with globalization has been a spur to fundamentalism of various sorts.”

Real Time Tracking Pushed Via 'Christian Science Monitor'

Real time mass surveillance as means of alternative road tax for a Romish Masonic government that subverts national security in order to keep the highways far from such key properties as Georgetown and Catholic Universities within Washington, D.C.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0227/p08s01-comv.html

A road map to better US roads
Congress should heed a panel that suggests replacing a tax on gas with one on miles driven.

By the Monitor's Editorial Board from the February 27, 2009 edition

It sounds Orwellian, the idea of tracking drivers from space, then taxing them based on miles traveled. But taxing miles instead of gasoline is a more reliable way to pay for America's highways. And it's not the Big Brother intrusion it appears to be.

Gas taxes – at both the federal and state levels – must inevitably go the way of the gas guzzler.

As vehicles become more fuel-efficient, they'll drink less gas, and thus produce less revenue to maintain and improve America's aging roads and mass transit. Add electric cars to the mix, and this revenue stream turns to a trickle.

This is one reason why a bipartisan blue-ribbon panel this week unanimously recommends replacing the federal gas tax with a tax on "vehicle miles traveled" (VMT) by 2020 – and indexing it for inflation. (At 18 cents per gallon, the federal gas tax has gone unchanged since 1993.)

In Europe, the Netherlands will transition to a VMT by 2014 and Denmark by 2016. Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Minnesota, and Idaho are looking at a mileage tax.

Behind this trend lies another important realization: Financing for transport infrastructure can no longer depend on indirect fees hidden in the overall cost of a gallon of gas but must rely more on direct user fees, such as tolling and congestion pricing.

Gasoline taxes may have sufficed to build the highways of the 20th century, but they've done little to influence vehicle use of roads. Changing behavior is the key to 21st century transport that must unclog crowded highways and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Taxing miles alerts drivers to the real cost of using roads and can better motivate them to drive less.

But critics are ringing the privacy alarm, and also warning of costs to the poor who must drive.

These fears can evaporate once Americans learn how the VMT works. Oregon tested the idea in 2006 with vehicles outfitted with GPS transponders. When the drivers pulled up to designated gas stations, devices at the pump calculated how much they owed in mileage tax and adjusted their gas bills.

Like a one-way television signal that doesn't communicate back which TV show a person is watching, Oregon used a one-way signal that simply tracked miles, not destinations.

As for burdening the poor, the VMT is a wash compared with a gas tax. People who drive a lot today – whether poor or not – pay more in gas taxes because they buy more gas. The same would hold true for a mileage tax: Drive more, pay more.

As it turns out, 9 out of 10 of the drivers in the Oregon experiment preferred the mileage tax to the gas tax; about 20 percent changed their driving habits.

Last week, the US Department of Transportation secretary spoke favorably of the VMT, but the White House press secretary quickly dismissed the idea – odd for an administration interested in innovation.

Members of Congress, which commissioned the panel in the first place, can drive the VMT idea when they reauthorize the surface transport bill, which expires this year. Well they know the fragility of the federal Highway Trust Fund, which last year neared bankruptcy and needed an $8 billion infusion because the gas tax couldn't keep up with repair and improvement needs.

A VMT is the more reliable and efficient way to pay for transport. Its time has come.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0304/p08s04-cole.html

A mileage tax on drivers? Not so fast.

Regarding the Feb. 27 editorial, "A road map to better US roads": The editorial is correct in that the United States is not funding its road infrastructure enough and governments are not transparent about it. These are both simple problems to resolve. Pass funding bills that fund roads adequately from the general budget (state, local, and national) and call it what it is.

However, the idea of a vehicle mileage tax (VMT) is a bad one. The idea that roads should or can be paid for by those who use them suggests that by not driving or driving less you are not benefiting from them. That is completely wrong.

Roads provide access of all kinds – police, fire, and medical services, for example. Furthermore, virtually every item you purchase has traveled over a road at some point.

The simple fact is that one of the fundamentals for our economic success and development as a nation has been our ability to move about freely. This has provided us with greater benefit than we can ever realistically calculate. To believe that roads are of value only to those who choose to use them in a car is a gross underestimation and misunderstanding.

Gary Tatsch
Carrollton, Texas

Creating a VMT would result in rewarding people who purchase gas-guzzling vehicles and punishing those who don't. That will not help reduce consumption. The people who cause greater damage to road surfaces drive heavy, less-efficient vehicles. With a VMT, they wouldn't pay for their share of road damage in taxation. This would shift the burden to the drivers of more efficient vehicles. It would also result in more pollution.

If we really want to have the true costs of cars and the road system covered there is an easy way to do it. Total all the costs of the road system, both federally and locally. These costs would have to include new construction, maintenance, police, and other safety needs. Then divide this number by the number of gallons anticipated to be used. There you have it: the necessary tax per gallon required to fund our needs.

Ralph Durham
Sunnyvale, Calif.

Plausible insight into why such attitudes emanate from the 'Christian Science Monitor':

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/jws_christian_science.htm

Making it incredibly easy to eliminate dissidents:

http://avlesbeluskesexposed.blogspot.com/2008_08_10_archive.html

Jesuitical Futurism Left Behind

'Futurism' is the idea of a future figure anti-Christ such as a Damien Thorn of the Omen movies' , developed by Jesuits as a distraction from
'Historicism' of the anti-Christ as the historical Roman Catholic Church

From http://www.lmn.org/magazine/170/Jesuits.html

By Steve Wohlberg


Pastor Wohlberg currently lives in Fort Worth, Texas. This article is adapted from his recent books, Truth Left Behind and The Left Behind Deception.

Modern Christianity has largely forgotten the importance of the Protestant Reformation, which took place during the 1500s. “The sixteenth century presents the spectacle of a stormy sunrise after a dismal night. Europe awoke from long sleep of superstition. The dead arose. The witnesses to truth who had been silenced and slain stood up once more and renewed their testimony. The martyred confessors reappeared in the Reformers. There was a cleansing of the spiritual sanctuary. Civil and religious liberty were inaugurated. The discovery of printing and revival of learning accelerated the movement. There was progress everywhere. Columbus struck across the ocean and opened a new hemisphere to view. Rome was shaken on her seven hills, and lost one-half of her dominions. Protestant nations were created. The modern world was called into existence.”1

For almost a thousand years, Europe had been ruled by the iron hand of Rome. Only a few Bibles existed then, and Christianity was largely permeated with superstition. Faith in Jesus Christ, heartfelt appreciation for His love, and a simple trust in His death on the cross, were almost unknown. The New Testament truth about grace, full forgiveness, and the free gift of eternal life to believers in the Son of God (Romans 6:23), had been buried under a mass of tradition. Then Martin Luther arose like a lion in Germany. After a period of tremendous personal struggle, Martin Luther began teaching justification by faith in Jesus Christ (being declared “just” by God), rather than through reliance on “creature merits,” or any human works (Romans 1:16; 3:26, 28; 5:1).

Martin Luther, as well as all of the other Reformers, were unanimous in their interpretation of the Antichrist as the papacy.

Luther’s Discovery

Eventually, Martin Luther turned to the prophecies. By candlelight, he read about the “little horn,” the “man of sin,” and “the beast,” and he was shocked as the Holy Spirit spoke to his heart. Finally, he saw the truth and said to himself, “Why, these prophecies apply to the Roman Catholic Church!” As he wrestled with this new insight, the voice of God echoed loudly in his soul, saying, “Preach the word!” (2 Timothy 4:2). And so, at the risk of losing his life, Martin Luther preached publicly and in print to an astonished people that Papal Rome was indeed the Antichrist of Bible prophecy. Because of this dual message of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ apart from works and of Papal Rome being the Antichrist, the river of history literally changed its course. Hundreds of thousands of people in Europe and in England left the Catholic Church.

“‘There are two great truths that stand out in the preaching that brought about the Protestant Reformation,’ American Bible Commentator, Ralph Woodrow, reminds us, ‘The just shall live by faith, not by the works of Romanism and the Papacy is the Antichrist of Scripture.’ It was a message for Christ and against Antichrist. The entire Reformation rests upon this twofold testimony.’”2 It has been said that the Reformation first discovered Jesus Christ, and then, in the blazing light of Christ, it discovered the Antichrist. This mighty, Spirit-filled movement, for Christ and against the Antichrist, shook the world.

H. Grattan Guinness wrote these memorable words: “From the first, and throughout, that movement [the Reformation] was energized and guided by the prophetic word. Luther never felt strong and free to war against the Papal apostasy till he recognized the pope as Antichrist. It was then that he burned the Papal bull. Knox’s first sermon, the sermon that launched him on his mission as a reformer, was on the prophecies concerning the Papacy. The reformers embodied their interpretations of prophecy in their confessions of faith, and Calvin in his ‘Institutes.’ All of the reformers were unanimous in the matter, even the mild and cautious Melanchthon was as assured of the antipapal meaning of these prophecies as was Luther himself. And their interpretation of these prophecies determined their reforming action. It led them to protest against Rome with extraordinary strength and undaunted courage. It nerved them to resist the claims of the apostate Church to the utmost. It made them martyrs; it sustained them at the stake. And the views of the Reformers were shared by thousands, by hundreds of thousands. They were adopted by princes and peoples. Under their influence nations abjured their allegiance to the false priest of Rome.

“In the reaction that followed, all the powers of hell seemed to be let loose upon the adherents of the Reformation. War followed war: tortures, burnings, and massacres were multiplied. Yet the Reformation stood undefeated and unconquerable. God’s word upheld it, and the energies of His Almighty Spirit. It was the work of Christ as truly as the founding of the Church eighteen centuries ago; and the revelation of the future which He gave from heaven—that prophetic book with which the Scripture closes—was one of the mightiest instruments employed in its accomplishment.”3

A Counter-Reformation

In 1545, the Catholic Church convened one of its most famous councils in history, which took place north of Rome in a city called Trent. The Council of Trent actually continued for three sessions, ending in 1563. One of the main purposes of this Council was for Catholics to plan a counterattack against Martin Luther and the Protestants. Thus the Council of Trent became a center for Rome’s Counter-Reformation. Up to this point, Rome’s main method of attack had been largely frontal—the open burning of Bibles and of heretics. Yet this warfare only confirmed in the minds of Protestants the conviction that Papal Rome was indeed the Beast which would “make war with the saints” (Revelation 13:7). Therefore a new tactic was needed, something less obvious. This is where the Jesuits come in.

On August 15, 1534, Ignatius Loyola (in the title picture) founded a secretive Catholic order called the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. The Jesuits definitely have a dark history of intrigue and sedition, that’s why they were expelled from Portugal (1759), France (1764), Spain (1767), Naples (1767), and Russia (1820). “Jesuit priests have been known throughout history as the most wicked political arm of the Roman Catholic Church. Edmond Paris, in his scholarly work, The Secret History of the Jesuits, reveals and documents much of this information.”4 At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church gave the Jesuits the specific assignment of destroying Protestantism and bringing people back to the Mother Church. This was to be done not only through the Inquisition and through torture, but also through theology.

At the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned to develop a new interpretation of Scripture that would counteract the Protestant Reformation, specifically, the application of the biblical Antichrist to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Jesuit Commission

At the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to develop a new interpretation of Scripture that would counteract the Protestant application of the Bible’s Antichrist prophecies to the Roman Catholic Church. Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), a brilliant Jesuit priest and doctor of theology from Spain, basically said, “Here am I, send me.” Like Martin Luther, Francisco Ribera also read by candlelight the prophecies about the Antichrist, the little horn, that man of sin, and the Beast. But because of his dedication and allegiance to the Pope, he came to conclusions vastly different from those of the Protestants. “Why, these prophecies don’t apply to the Catholic Church at all!” Ribera said. Then to whom do they apply? Ribera proclaimed, “To only one sinister man who will rise up at the end of time!” “Fantastic!” was the reply from Rome, and this viewpoint was quickly adopted as the official Roman Catholic position on the Antichrist.

Francisco Ribera and Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, two Jesuit scholars, published works that taught that the Scriptures written by Paul, Daniel, and John had nothing whatsoever to say about the Papal power.

-------

Francisco Ribera (1537 - 1591)

-------

“In 1590, Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem.”5 “Ribera denied the Protestant Scriptural Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2) as seated in the church of God—asserted by Augustine, Jerome, Luther and many reformers. He set on an infidel Antichrist, outside the church of God.”6 “The result of his work [Ribera’s] was a twisting and maligning of prophetic truth.”7

Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, who helped popularize and propagate the futuristic interpretation of biblical prophecy.

Following close behind Francisco Ribera was another brilliant Jesuit scholar, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) of Rome. Between 1581 and 1593, Cardinal Bellarmine published his “Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed Points of the Christian Belief Against the Heretics of This Time.” In these lectures, he agreed with Ribera. “The futurist teachings of Ribera were further popularized by an Italian cardinal and the most renowned of all Jesuit controversialists. His writings claimed that Paul, Daniel, and John had nothing whatsoever to say about the Papal power. The futurists’ school won general acceptance among Catholics. They were taught that Antichrist was a single individual who would not rule until the very end of time.”8 Through the work of these two tricky Jesuit scholars, we might say that a brand new baby was born into the world. Protestant historians have given this baby a name—Jesuit Futurism. In fact, Francisco Ribera has been called the Father of Futurism.

Defining the Issue

Before we go much farther, let’s define some terms. Historicism is the belief that Biblical prophecies about the little horn, the man of sin, the Antichrist, the Beast, and the Babylonian Harlot of Revelation 17, all apply to the developing history of Christianity and to the ongoing struggle between Jesus Christ and Satan within the Christian Church, culminating at the end of time. Historicism sees these prophecies as having a direct application to Papal Rome as a system whose doctrines are actually a denial of the New Testament message of free salvation by grace through simple faith in Jesus Christ, apart from works. Historicism was the primary prophetic viewpoint of the Protestant Reformers. In direct opposition to Historicism, and rising up as a razor-sharp counterattack on Protestantism, was that of the Jesuits with their viewpoint of Futurism, which basically says, “The Antichrist prophecies have nothing to do with the history of Papal Rome, rather, they apply to only one sinister man who comes at the end.”

Thus Jesuit Futurism sweeps 1,500 years of prophetic history under the proverbial rug by inserting its infamous GAP. This theory teaches that when Rome fell, prophecy stopped, only to continue again right around the time of the Rapture, thus the “gap” was created. The ten horns, the little horn, the Beast, and the Antichrist have nothing to do with Christians until this “last-day Antichrist” should appear. According to this viewpoint, there were no prophecies being fulfilled during the Dark Ages!

Inroads in Protestantism

For almost 300 years after the Council of Trent, Jesuit Futurism remained largely inside the realm of Catholicism, but the plan of the Jesuits was that these theological tenets be adopted by Protestants. This adoption process actually began in the early 1800s in England, and from there it spread to America. The story of how this happened is both fascinating and tragic. As I briefly share some of the highlights, I want to clarify that I am not judging the genuineness of these Christian men. They may have been sincere, yet at the same time deceived in some areas of their theological understanding.

“The Futurism of Ribera never posed a positive threat to the Protestants for three centuries. It was virtually confined to the Roman Church. But early in the nineteenth century it sprang forth with vehemence and latched on to Protestants of the Established Church of England.”9 Dr. Samuel Roffey Maitland (1792-1866), a lawyer and Bible scholar, became a librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury. It is very likely that one day he discovered Ribera’s commentary in the library. In any event, in 1826 he published a widely-read book attacking the Reformation and supporting Ribera’s idea of a future one-man Antichrist. For the next ten years, in tract after tract, he continued his anti-Reformation rhetoric. As a result of his zeal and strong attacks against the Reformation in England, the Protestantism of that very nation which produced the King James Bible (1611) received a crushing blow.

After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). In 1850, Newman wrote his “Letter on Anglican Difficulties,” revealing that one of the goals in the Oxford Movement was to finally absorb “the various English denominations and parties” back into the Church of Rome. After publishing a pamphlet endorsing Todd’s futurism about a one-man Antichrist, Newman soon became a full Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite “Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood.”10

Then came the much-respected Scottish Presbyterian minister, Edward Irving (1792-1834), the acknowledged forerunner of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Irving pastored the large Chalcedonian Chapel in London with over 1,000 members. When Irving turned to the prophecies, he eventually accepted the one-man Antichrist idea of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, yet he went a step further. Somewhere around 1830, Edward Irving began to teach the unique idea of a two-phase return of Christ, the first phase being a secret rapture prior to the rise of the Antichrist. Where he got this idea is a matter of much dispute. Journalist Dave MacPherson believes Irving accepted it is a result of a prophetic revelation given to a young Scottish girl named Margaret McDonald.11 In any case, the fact is, Irving taught it!

Adding to the Futuristic interpretation of prophecy, John Nelson Darby added the theory of dispensationalism, or the idea tht God deals with mankind in major dispensations or periods of time.

In the midst of this growing anti-Protestant climate in England, there arose a man by the name of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). A brilliant lawyer, pastor, and theologian, he wrote more than 53 books on Bible subjects. A much-respected Christian and a man of deep piety, Darby took a strong stand in favor of the infallibility of the Bible in contrast with the liberalism of his day. He became one of the leaders of a group in Plymouth, England, which became known as the Plymouth Brethren. Darby’s contribution to the development of evangelical theology has been so great that he has been called The Father of Modern Dispensationalism. Yet John Nelson Darby, like Edward Irving, also became a strong promoter of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture followed by a one-man Antichrist. In fact, this teaching has become a hallmark of Dispensationalism.

Dispensationalism is the theory that God deals with mankind in major dispensations or periods. According to Darby, we are now in the “Church Age,” that is, until the Rapture. After the Rapture, then the seven-year period of Daniel 9:27 will supposedly kick in, and this is when the Antichrist will rise up against the Jews. In fact, John Nelson Darby laid much of the foundation for the present popular removal of Daniel’s 70th week away from history and from Jesus Christ in favor of applying it to a future Tribulation after the Rapture. Thus, in spite of all the positives of his ministry, Darby followed Maitland, Todd, Bellarmine, and Ribera by incorporating the teachings of Futurism into his theology. This created a link between John Nelson Darby, the Father of Dispen-sationalism, and the Jesuit Francisco Ribera, the Father of Futurism. Darby visited America six times between 1859-1874, preaching in all of its major cities, during which time he definitely planted the seeds of Futurism in American soil. The child of the Jesuits was growing up.

Futurism in America

One of the most important figures in this whole drama is Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), a Kansas lawyer who was greatly influenced by the writings of Darby. In 1909, Scofield published the first edition of his famous Scofield Reference Bible. In the early 1900s, this Bible became so popular in American Protestant Bible schools that it was necessary to print literally millions of copies. Yet, in the much-respected footnotes of this very Bible, Scofield injected large doses of the fluid of Futurism also found in the writings of Darby, Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera. Through the Scofield Bible, the Jesuit child reached young adulthood. The doctrine of an Antichrist still to come was becoming firmly established inside 20th-century American Protestantism.

Cyrus Scofield, the famed publisher of the Scofield Reference Bible, liberally interspersed the footnotes of his Bible with large doses of Futurism. These footnotes are still widely accepted by many theologians today.

The Moody Bible Institute and the Dallas Theological Seminary have strongly supported the teachings of John Nelson Darby, and this has continued to fuel Futurism’s growth. Then in the 1970s, Pastor Hal Lindsey, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, released his blockbuster book The Late Great Planet Earth. This 177-page, easy-to-read volume brought Futurism to the masses of American Christianity, and beyond. The New York Times labeled it “The number one best-seller of the decade.” Over 30 million copies have been sold, and it has been translated into over 30 languages. Through The Late Great Planet Earth, Jesuit Futurism took a strong hold over the Protestant Christian world.

--------

--------

Left Behind

Now we have Left Behind. In the 1990s, Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins took the future one-man Antichrist idea of Hal Lindsey, Scofield, Darby, Irving, Newman, Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, and turned it into “The most successful Christian-fiction series ever” (Publishers Weekly). Hal Lindsey’s book, The Late Great Planet Earth, was largely theological, which limited its appeal, while Left Behind is a sequence of highly imaginative novels, “overflowing with suspense, action, and adventure,” a “Christian thriller,” with a “label its creators could never have predicted: blockbuster success” (Entertainment Weekly). The much-respected television ministries of Jack Van Impe, Peter and Paul Lalonde, and Pastor John Hagee, have all worked together to produce LEFT BEHIND: The Movie. The entire project has even caught the attention of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, resulting in an interview of LaHaye and Jenkins on Larry King Live. The Left Behind books have been made available on displays at WalMart, Fry’s Electronics, and inside countless other stores.

--------

--------

Again, let me clarify, I am not judging the genuineness of the authors of Left Behind and the leaders of these television ministries. They may be sincere, and have their own walk with God. But they are deceived into wrong ideas concerning Bible prophecy. God may even use Left Behind to influence people for Jesus Christ. But, in the full light of Scripture, prophecy, and the Protestant Reformation, something is terribly wrong. Left Behind is now teaching much of the same Jesuit Futurism as Francisco Ribera, which is hiding the real truth about the Antichrist. Through Left Behind, the floodgates of Futurism have been opened, unleashing a massive tidal wave of false prophecy which is now sweeping over America. Sadly, it is a false “idea whose time has come.”

The Prophetic Foundation

As we have already seen, the theological foundation for the entire Left Behind series is the application of the “seven years” of Daniel 9:27 to a future period of Tribulation. Are you ready for this? Guess who was one of the very first scholars to slice Daniel’s 70th week away from the first 69 weeks, sliding it down to the end of time? It was Francisco Ribera! “Ribera’s primary apparatus was the seventy weeks. He taught that Daniel’s 70th week was still in the future. . . It was as though God put a giant rubber band on this Messianic time measure. Does this supposition sound familiar? This is exactly the scenario used by Hal Lindsey and a multitude of other current prophecy teachers.”12

When most Christians look at the last 1,500 years, how much fulfilled prophecy do they see? None, zero, because almost everything is now being applied to a future time period after the Rapture. As we have seen, this GAP idea originated with the Jesuits, and its insertion into the majority of 21st century prophetic teaching is now blinding millions of hearts and eyes to what has gone before, and to what is happening right now inside the Church. “It is this GAP theory that permeates Futurism’s interpretation of all apocalyptic prophecy.”13 In love and in the Spirit of Jesus Christ, someone should publicly appeal to the major prophetic television ministries of today to re-evaluate their positions. Hopefully, like noble ships with a new command from their captain, they will yet change their course.

Jesuit Futurism has almost completely changed the beliefs of Protestant Historicism. “The proper eschatological term for the view most taught today is Futurism, which fuels the confusion of Dispensationalism. The futuristic school of Bible prophecy came from the Roman Catholic Church, specifically her Jesuit theologians. . . However the alternative has been believed for centuries. It is known as Historicism.”14 “It is a matter for deep regret that those who hold and advocate the Futurist system at the present day, Protestants as they are for the most part, are thus really playing into the hands of Rome, and helping to screen the Papacy from detection as the Antichrist.”15

Who Had It Right?

Who had the right theology—those who were burned at the stake for Jesus Christ, or those who lit the fires? Who had the true Bible doctrine—the martyrs or their persecutors? Who had the correct interpretation of the Antichrist—those who died trusting in the blood of Christ, or those who shed the blood of God’s dear saints? Dear friend, Jesuit Futurism is now at war with the Protestant Reformation by denying its power-packed application of prophecy to the Vatican. “The futurist school of Bible prophecy was created for one reason, and one reason only: to counter the Protestant Reformation!”16 In fact, Jesuit Futurism is at war with the prophecies of the Word of God itself! And if that’s not enough, consider this. Jesuit Futurism originated with the Roman Catholic Church, which makes it the very doctrine of the Antichrist! And when Christian ministries and movies like A Thief in the Night, Apocalypse, Revelation, Tribulation, and Left Behind, proclaim an Antichrist who comes only after the Rapture, what are they really doing? I shudder to even say it. Are you ready for this? They are sincerely and yet unknowingly teaching the doctrine of the Antichrist!

Now you know why truth has been left behind. You are now able to see The Left Behind deception. I appeal to you in the loving name of Jesus Christ, the Crucified One—Don’t fall for it.

Notes1 H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation, p. 1222 Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome, Dorchester House Publications, Dorchester House, England, 1991, pp. 202, 2033 H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation, pp. 136, 1374 Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative. Abundant Life Ministries Reformed Press, 1991, p. 315 George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1956, pp. 37-386 Ralph Thompson, Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth, p. 897 Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 328 Ralph Woodrow, Great Prophecies of the Bible, p. 1989 Ralph Thompson, Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth, p. 9110 H. Grattan Guinness, History Unveiling Prophecy or Time As an Interpreter, New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1905, p. 28911 Dave MacPherson, The Incredible Cover-Up: Exposing the Origins of Rapture Theories. Omega Publications, Medford Oregon, 198012 Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 3513 Ralph Thompson, Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth, p. 9014 Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 615 Joseph Tanner, Daniel and the Revelation: The Chart of Prophecy and Our Place in It, A Study of the Historical and Futurist Interpretation. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1898, p. 1616 Robert Caringola, Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 34

..

Steve Wohlberg's books are available from the Laymen Ministries bookstore. Exploding the Israel Deception takes a look at the current popularity of seeking fulfillment of prophecy in the Middle East, and shows what the Bible indicates about these prophecies.

The Left Behind Deception is select chapters from Truth Left Behind. These books will give you the history of the teachings of the Rapture, and show you the truth of what the Scriptures say about it. The Left Behind Deception is a great gift for one who has questions on the Rapture, but isn't so in depth as to be overwhelming.
Source: http://www.lmn.org/magazine/170/Jesuits.html

Found at Endr Times

http://endrtimes.blogspot.com/2008/12/left-behind-by-jesuits.html

Hillsdale College Honors Waco Mass Murder Cover Up Figure Louis Freeh

Dr. Larry P. Arnn, the president of Hillsdale College

Hillsdale College, Hillsdale Michigan, USA

Louis Freeh giving commencement address at Hillsdale College, 2008

Louis B. Freeh, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,

President David M. O'Connell, C.M., and Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston.

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/burial/doc/b_hanssen.html

"No One In the FBI Wanted Anyone Harmed." For seven and a half years, as well as the autopsy reports, Mr. Freeh had access to crime scene photos and other forensic information. He had direct access to the FBI agents who were on the scene at Waco. And for seven and a half years, Mr. Freeh has been asserting the good intentions and righteous actions of the FBI in Waco. For seven and a half years Mr. Freeh, one of America's most prominent Catholics, has been blaming the Davidians for killing their own, blaming them for killing all those children and babies and mothers ... Speaking of the deaths of the Davidians just last September, Director Freeh said: "No one in the FBI wanted anyone harmed. Everyone did their best under extraordinarily difficult circumstances...." (Dallas Morning News, Plaintiffs take nothing 9/21/2000.)

Arrest the Davidian Murderers. When Sen. John Danforth issued his own report on the Waco Holocaust, he praised the FBI and blamed the Davidians for the Davidian deaths on April 19, 1993. America's famous Catholic, Louis Freeh, termed the Danforth report "both vigorous and thorough." In that vigorous and thorough report, Sen. Danforth revealed that the current leader of the Branch Davidians, fire survivor Clive Doyle, admitted to the Texas Rangers that the Davidians started the fire. Furthermore, the Danforth report says Doyle's hands were burned in a manner consistent with a "flashback" from a liquid fire; Doyle's jacket contained flammable liquids on both sleeves; the FBI has audio tapes of (alleged) Davidians conversing about starting the fire, and that "several" FBI agents saw Davidians "acting as if they were starting a fire." (Final Report, pgs. 17-20. ) Compelling evidence? An honest FBI director who believed the Danforth report was "both vigorous and thorough" would see to it that Clive Doyle (and other fire survivors) were arrested and charged in the Davidian deaths. But Clive Doyle and the fire survivors have not been criminally charged--no one has been charged for the deaths of murdered Davidians. Clearly, Mr. Freeh does not himself believe the story he tells. Perhaps he knows something he isn't mentioning. Let's look at the evidence he surely examined.

Let's Use Mr. Freeh's Eyes. Recall that Mr. Freeh has had first hand information on the Davidian deaths available to him for years. And for years Mr. Freeh has been saying the Davidians killed their own on April 19, 1993. Let's look at the October 1993 DoJ Report, published shortly after Mr. Freeh came to office. "The Tarrant County Medical Examiner's office, assisted by a team of anthropologists from the Smithsonian Institution, assisted in recovering the remains of the persons killed during the fire ...." (pg. 311). The Smithsonian experts have for years been the top forensic consultants to the FBI. Scrutiny of the autopsy reports will reveal that Drs. Douglas Ubelaker and Douglas Owsley were the Smithsonian experts present in the mortuary when the autopsies were performed. Furthermore, the pathologist of record has testified under oath that FBI experts lent other assistance during performance of the autopsies, such as fingerprint and DNA identification. These were first class autopsies. The FBI's top brains were right in the thick of things, helping the Texas locals out. But now let's focus on what the DoJ report says on the death of one of the mothers: "Judy Schneider was buried alive when the bunker collapsed," (pg. 315). "The bunker" is FBI-speak for a concrete room, originally built to provide fire-proof protection for church records. According to the official story, the moms and kids fled to that room on April 19 and died when it collapsed on top of them. At least, that's what the autopsy reports say.

"Inasmuch as ye have done unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." -- Matthew, 25:40

Statue at Hillsdale College of Margaret Thatcher

(1st statue of Thatcher in the U.S.)

Spiritually Smart- Waco
Continuing Counter Reformation- Hillsdale College: What 30 Years War?

John Hagee's Apparent Lack of Interest In History

When I first heard about John Hagee and his characterization of the Roman Catholic Church as “the Great Whore,” an “apostate church,” and a “false cult system,” blaming it for the WW2 holocaust of the Jewish peoples, I sent his organization an email alerting him to this blog that I created "Continuing Counter Reformation" which exposes the WW2 era Jesuit Superior General Black Pope Wlodimir Ledochowski. I received the following reply:

March 12, 2008

Dear Doug,

On behalf of John Hagee Ministries, we appreciate the support and confidence you have in Pastor Hagee’s teachings.

Our staff at John Hagee Ministries reviewed your e-mail forwarding your website information.

Thank you for providing Pastor Hagee with the web link listed in your letter. Thank you for sharing this information with Pastor Hagee. The web site link has been duly noted and will be reviewed by our staff at the first opportunity.

Please understand that the demands on this ministry have placed a tremendous responsibility on the hands of our Shepherd and staff. Please understand why he is unable to respond and comment on this web site information.

Remember God’s word says, “Delight yourself in the Lord and He will grant you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the Lord and He will bring it to pass”. [Psalm 27:4]. We pray that God will fill you with His peace and joy for “the joy of the Lord is our strength”. [ Nehemiah 8:10].

God bless you.

Sincerely,

Edward Martinez

John Hagee Ministries

In looking at my web counter I could find no indication that anyone at John Hagee Ministries looked at this blog.

Is Hagee just another fraternal order controlled minion?

What can one expect from a ministry headed by a man who endorsed John McCain- the U.S. Presidential candidate perhaps most likely to ultimately steer the U.S. into a destructive 2 front war that it will loose?!




Jesuitical Ledochowskiesque Set Up?

Wlodimir Ledochowski's Plausible Childhood Revenge Vow to Destroy Prussia
Wlodimir Ledochowski Mission, Motivation, Geo-Political Chess-Board
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Plausible Counter Reformation Strategy
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Plausible Childhood Inspiration
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Goal Predicted by Max Kolbe
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Goal Via Goals
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Counter Reformation in Art
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Religious Demographic Cleansing
Wlodimir Ledochowski's Counter Reformation Customerly Overlooked
Wlodimir Ledochowski War Culpability Counter Reformation 'Aim' Admission

Criminal Apostate US President GW Bush A 'Secret Catholic'

The U.S. President that micromanages torture, it figures.

One Beast Bowing to Another Beast

By Daniel Burke
Sunday, April 13, 2008; B02

Shortly after Pope Benedict XVI's election in 2005, President Bush met with a small circle of advisers in the Oval Office. As some mentioned their own religious backgrounds, the president remarked that he had read one of the new pontiff's books about faith and culture in Western Europe.

Save for one other soul, Bush was the only non-Catholic in the room. But his interest in the pope's writings was no surprise to those around him. As the White House prepares to welcome Benedict on Tuesday, many in Bush's inner circle expect the pontiff to find a kindred spirit in the president. Because if Bill Clinton can be called America's first black president, some say, then George W. Bush could well be the nation's first Catholic president.

This isn't as strange a notion as it sounds. Yes, there was John F. Kennedy. But where Kennedy sought to divorce his religion from his office, Bush has welcomed Roman Catholic doctrine and teachings into the White House and based many important domestic policy decisions on them.

"I don't think there's any question about it," says Rick Santorum, former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and a devout Catholic, who was the first to give Bush the "Catholic president" label. "He's certainly much more Catholic than Kennedy."

Bush attends an Episcopal church in Washington and belongs to a Methodist church in Texas, and his political base is solidly evangelical. Yet this Protestant president has surrounded himself with Roman Catholic intellectuals, speechwriters, professors, priests, bishops and politicians. These Catholics -- and thus Catholic social teaching -- have for the past eight years been shaping Bush's speeches, policies and legacy to a degree perhaps unprecedented in U.S. history.

"I used to say that there are more Catholics on President Bush's speechwriting team than on any Notre Dame starting lineup in the past half-century," said former Bush scribe -- and Catholic -- William McGurn.

Bush has also placed Catholics in prominent roles in the federal government and relied on Catholic tradition to make a public case for everything from his faith-based initiative to antiabortion legislation. He has wedded Catholic intellectualism with evangelical political savvy to forge a powerful electoral coalition.

"There is an awareness in the White House that the rich Catholic intellectual tradition is a resource for making the links between Christian faith, religiously grounded moral judgments and public policy," says Richard John Neuhaus, a Catholic priest and editor of the journal First Things who has tutored Bush in the church's social doctrines for nearly a decade.

In the late 1950s, Kennedy's Catholicism was a political albatross, and he labored to distance himself from his church. Accepting the Democratic nomination in 1960, he declared his religion "not relevant."

Bush and his administration, by contrast, have had no such qualms about their Catholic connections. At times, they've even seemed to brandish them for political purposes. Even before he got to the White House, Bush and his political guru Karl Rove invited Catholic intellectuals to Texas to instruct the candidate on the church's social teachings. In January 2001, Bush's first public outing as president in the nation's capital was a dinner with Washington's then-archbishop, Theodore McCarrick. A few months later, Rove (an Episcopalian) asked former White House Catholic adviser Deal Hudson to find a priest to bless his West Wing office.

"There was a very self-conscious awareness that religious conservatives had brought Bush into the White House and that [the administration] wanted to do what they had been mandated to do," says Hudson.

To conservative Catholics, that meant holding the line on same-sex marriage, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research, and working to limit abortion in the United States and abroad while nominating judges who would eventually outlaw it. To make the case, Bush has often borrowed Pope John Paul II's mantra of promoting a "culture of life." Many Catholics close to him believe that the approximately 300 judges he has seated on the federal bench -- most notably Catholics John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court -- may yet be his greatest legacy.

Bush also used Catholic doctrine and rhetoric to push his faith-based initiative, a movement to open federal funding to grass-roots religious groups that provide social services to their communities. Much of that initiative is based on the Catholic principle of "subsidiarity" -- the idea that local people are in the best position to solve local problems. "The president probably knows absolutely nothing about the Catholic catechism, but he's very familiar with the principle of subsidiarity," said H. James Towey, former director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives who is now the president of a Catholic college in southwestern Pennsylvania. "It's the sense that the government is not the savior and that problems like poverty have spiritual roots."

Nonetheless, Bush is not without his Catholic critics. Some contend that his faith-based rhetoric is just small-government conservatism dressed up in religious vestments, and that his economic policies, including tax cuts for the rich, have created a wealth gap that clearly upends the Catholic principle of solidarity with the poor.

John Carr, a top public policy director for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, calls the Bush administration's legacy a "tale of two policies."

"The best of the Bush administration can be seen in their work in development assistance on HIV/AIDS in Africa," says Carr. "In domestic policy, the conservatism trumps the compassion."

And other prominent Catholics charge the president with disregarding Rome's teachings on the Iraq war and torture. But even when he has taken actions that the Vatican opposes, such as invading Iraq, Bush has shown deference to church teachings. Before he sent U.S. troops into Baghdad to topple Saddam Hussein, he met with Catholic "theocons" to discuss just-war theory. White House adviser Leonard Leo, who heads Catholic outreach for the Republican National Committee, says that Bush "has engaged in dialogue with Catholics and shared perspectives with Catholics in a way I think is fairly unique in American politics."

Moreover, people close to Bush say that he has professed a not-so-secret admiration for the church's discipline and is personally attracted to the breadth and unity of its teachings. A New York priest who has befriended the president said that Bush respects the way Catholicism starts at the foundation -- with the notion that the papacy is willed by God and that the pope is Peter's successor. "I think what fascinates him about Catholicism is its historical plausibility," says this priest. "He does appreciate the systematic theology of the church, its intellectual cogency and stability." The priest also says that Bush "is not unaware of how evangelicalism -- by comparison with Catholicism -- may seem more limited both theologically and historically."

Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, another evangelical with an affinity for Catholic teaching, says that the key to understanding Bush's domestic policy is to view it through the lens of Rome. Others go a step further.

Paul Weyrich, an architect of the religious right, detects in Bush shades of former British prime minister Tony Blair, who converted to Catholicism last year. "I think he is a secret believer," Weyrich says of Bush. Similarly, John DiIulio, Bush's first director of faith-based initiatives, has called the president a "closet Catholic." And he was only half-kidding.

daniel.burke@religionnews.com

Daniel Burke is a national correspondent for Religion News Service.

Tupper Saussy: U.S. Roman to the Core

Read About the 20th Century Counter Reformation Master-Mind
26th Superior General Wlodimir Ledochowski